2018-01-03

Superhuman Meta Process

This is a more-or-less complete blueprint of the process I'm
currently using to run my life on the meta level. It is organized
around four major principles, each of which represents a
non-trivial design decision. This means that you could negate
each of them, and get something arguably sensible. The minor
points serve to explain further, and to map out some consequences
of taking the major principles seriously. For me, they are also
cached thoughts that help me make decisions.

Many of the minor points, fully expanded, would be enough
material for a separate blog post. However expanding them to that
level would be quite pointless. If you cannot extrapolate them on
your own, you probably shouldn't implement them anyway. In that
case, you can probably think of some other set of
principles that would be a better fit for you. One of the main
messages I'd like to communicate here is that designing your
meta process is worth the effort.

[Added later:] Many people asked me what exactly
I mean by "meta" and "meta process" in this context.
Let me clarify: I consider it thinking on the
meta level when I think something
like "what trajectory do I expect to have as a result
of my whole brain continuing to function as it already
tends to do, assuming I do nothing special with the
output of the thought process which I'm using right
now to simulate myself?". This simulation obviously
includes all sorts of everyday changes to my brain,
including acquiring new memories, habits, and preferences.
However the key question is, am I reflectively consistent?
Or: do I endorse the most accurate simulation of myself
that I can currently run?

The meta process is what happens
when I want to make sure that I always remain reflectively
consistent. Then I conjure up a special kind of self-modification
which desires to remember to do itself, and to continue to
hold on to enough power to always win. I aspire to make this
meta process an automatic part of myself, so that my most
accurate simulation of any of my future trajectories
already automatically includes self-consistency.

For the sake of brevity, I am writing everything
as black-and-white and seen from my personal point of view.

Meta process is life. It's OK to mess up
on the object level. However, there is no way to recover from
a broken meta level, except by luck. And luck is not
enough.

Transparent meta. This meta process
should be public, codified, and
teachable. It has nothing to do with keeping the object
level confidential.

No second meta. The meta meta process
is just letting the meta process naturally act on
itself.

Judge the meta process. Whether it's
other people or organizations, their meta process is what
you want to know (regardless of which parts they publicize).
Their object-level results are interesting only
insofar as they are evidence about their meta
process.

Seamless cooperation. Design your
meta process so that it benefits you when you are alone,
and also automatically cooperates when there's an
opportunity to do so. Then scheme to be around the people
you want to work with.

Difficulty maintenance. Choose your
object-level challenges strategically, to maximize how
much you learn and grow. However, your meta process must
always stay safely within the basin of convergence.

Series of expansions. Everything you
do might fail or be abandoned at any time. Strongly
prefer plans which are still beneficial if interrupted in
the middle.

Values flow outward. You want everything
that happens to happen because of your deep values
(this might, of course, include other beings achieving their values).
Everything else is a bug. Every bug is critical.

Full stack action. Everything below
your top-level values is a tool in their service. Tools
are not intrinsically good or bad, but you can make them
more or less useful. Useful tools can be stacked
together, so that actions propagate far without
distortion.

Cooperate not control. If other
people have compatible values, they want to cooperate
with you too. If they are adequate, you can't manipulate
their values, and you gain nothing by trying.

Reject invest-y power. Some kinds of
power increase your freedom. Some other kinds require an
ongoing investment of your time and energy, and explode
if you fail to provide it. The second kind binds you, and
ultimately forces you to give up your values. The second
kind is also easier, and you'll be tempted all the
time.

Do only what you want. Having inconsistent
preferences is a bug, and it's in your own best interest
to resolve it. Afterwards, there is no need to hold
yourself back. If you decide to be nice and share your
powers, do it because it's good for you.

Don't ask for permission. However,
when possible, ask for information, and ask to have your
models looked at. You'll avoid many mistakes and increase
your utility.

Don't apologize. Update. You aren't
in this for emotional comfort. By apologizing to someone
else who plays for real, you are insulting them by
suggesting that emotional comfort is what they are
after.

Automatic respect. If your models
predict you can't get away with doing something, you
won't do it. The burden is on others to be adequate at
seeing through your motives. There is no need to invoke
morality or any special principles here.

Trust only yourself. The burden is on
you to have adequate models. If you think someone will
cooperate because it's aligned with their real values,
you don't need trust. If you turn out to be wrong, that's
your problem. Screening people is always on.

Mental security. As a human, you
don't actually have consistent values, and it takes time
to figure out what they converge to. The world is highly
optimized to extract energy from you by distorting your
thoughts, and making you confused about your values. You
cannot trust yourself until you are adequate at seeing
through threats in real-time.

Aim for full adequacy. Do not (internally) compromise.
Discard inadequacy without second thought. Do not (internally) bow your
head to Moloch. Take ideas to their conclusion.

Everything for your own values.
However, use an adequate decision
theory. Neglecting the meta process is two-boxing, and
you must not do it even if it locally looks like a thing
to do.

Luck is not enough. It is not enough
even if it had already happened. Relying on luck exposes
that there is a mission-critical piece which you haven't
yet mastered. It'll get you sooner or later.

A plan is not enough. Do not trust
any human (including yourself) to do anything in the
future, unless all the options available now have been
adequately exploited.

Optimization never stops. Avoid
one-time effort if at all possible. Aim for long-term
stability of the process that generates improvements.
There is no room for the psychological comfort of
certainty.

Infinite inferential reach. It's not
enough to be one or two inferential steps ahead of
everyone else. Learn how to build towers of knowledge
which can fully support their own weight, so that you can
build ever higher. Do not pause as you create whole new
disciplines and branches of science.

Every bug is critical. Each
unexpected error, no matter how small, is a canary in the
coal mine for some bigger issue. The bigger issue will
get you if you don't deal with it right now.

Gain time by taking the time. You
know very well that your time is limited, and you'll
constantly be tempted to skip ahead by relaxing your
standards. However, each case will be a terrible
mistake.

Security from the start. If your
process is not secure now, it won't be secure later when
you need it to be. Talk in person. Walk outside. Take
notes on paper. Beware of consumer electronic
devices.

No gawking at adequacy. When you
start getting some things right, pretty soon most of
humanity will look like a bunch of clowns rolling around
in the mud. Moving on.

No falling in love. Being attracted
to someone is a sign that your mental security is
compromised, and that they are more adequate than you in
some respect. Treat it as an important bug report.

One strike and you're out. If you
think you can cheat without getting caught, you should do
it! However, if it becomes known that you have sabotaged
some important value, there will be no explanation that
makes it OK in front of other people who play for
real.

Update mental software. The meta process is
implemented by gradually self-modifying in the direction
of needing less meta-level correction.

Everything is a skill. You can learn
each of them, but it takes time, so be strategic.
Stealing skills from people similar to you is faster. If
you think something is not a skill, it means you don't
understand it yet.

Every skill is a mental skill. Every
skill tree can be traced back to what happens in human
minds. Generic mental skills have exceptional return on
investment, so make sure to grab them first.

Integrate your mind. Your
subconscious processing and emotions are more "you" than
your stream of consciousness. You'll not get anywhere if
there's any tension on the boundary.

Intentions don't matter. No one cares
about the narrative you are telling yourself about your
actions. If your mind is not integrated, that's your
problem. Take responsibility for all of yourself.

Install automatic processes. The
amount of things you can consciously track is very
limited. You won't get anywhere unless you can
self-modify on the spot and have your brain handle
everything in the background. Do it routinely.

Refactor your perception. Fully
integrating new understanding feels from the inside like
seeing the world differently. Do it routinely.

What kills you is blind spots. It's
OK to take big risks knowingly. But if you have a blind
spot, you cannot know the upper bound of the risk. You
should stop in your tracks at the tiniest suspicion of
having one.

No dirty imports. The world will
often offer you knowledge in a package deal. However, you
must break down every new piece of understanding into its
basic components, and own each of them. Gain time by
taking the time.